It's time for Elon to pay the piper and refund all users who were hoodwinked into purchasing FSD. Especially people who's cars are nearing end of life.
> If Google can't do it with its massive resources
The companies behind the SLS had and have an enormous amount of resources. Yet, they have failed to even launch it.
Arianespace has a huge amount of resources and experience too. Yet, when asked, they said landing a rocket couldn’t be done. Then, back-pedalling, that it was pointless and would never make any economic sense.
Yet, SpaceX has developed three generations of rockets (Falcon 1, 9 and heavy), builds them, launches them, iterates on them, lands them, reuses them, and is now working on a fourth rocket (SuperHeavy).
They have also created 4 different rocket engines and are working on two others.
Honestly, where are Boeing and Arianespace?
Another example? Microsoft, their incredible wealth of resources and superior position falling flat on their face with smartphones.
Funnily enough, Google getting the greatest share of the global smartphone OS market, despite having had no real experience with operating systems, consumer hardware, or licensing operating systems before.
Kodak, which had some of the first patent on digital camera sensors, going pretty much extinct despite their massive resources and market position.
Xerox, failing to ever enter the personal computer market despite designing what everyone else would copy for the next 10 or 20 years.
Sure, the amounts of resources and experience seem to help, a lot, but it also certainly doesn’t seem to help reliably predict any outcome.
Astra, maybe?
Difficult analogy because the barrier to entry's a lot lower for car mods vs orbital rocketry kits :)
Because almost no company has much more serious experience with self-driving cars, let alone FSD.
What does SpaceX have to do with Tesla? They're owned by a billionaire with his attention split, but otherwise are structured differently, are in different industries, and most likely have different cultures.
The cult of worshipping a single person has got to stop.
> While I do get your point and have my own doubts […]
Good thread on ground Tesla would need to make up to catch AV leaders here. https://twitter.com/Christiano92/status/1428671634131628033
Simulation is important for sure, and Tesla even talked about that as much. But you can only simulate the scenario's that you've thought of, it can't replace real world data, which again Tesla has several orders of magnitude more of than Waymo.
As for the comments about Dojo I think they're unfounded. Tesla has already proven that they can create their own custom chip and have shipped it to hundreds of thousands of cars. I don't see any reason to think they can't get the system running in the next year or so. But even if they can't do that in time they still have NVIDIA to fall back on. Elon even said in the talk that maybe it might not work out, and if that's the case they can always buy a solution.
There are many issues with Tesla's autopilot that are completely unrelated to the amount of data they have, and they will not be fixed with more data, and having more data will not make it easier to fix it. At this point, I would argue that the discussion about who owns more millions of miles of data is completely irrelevant.
Tesla has built out amazing infrastructure to capture extensive amounts of "hard" examples from their fleet, turn them around into labeled data for training very efficiently and then utilizing simulations to further broaden the distribution of such quirky long-tail events in their training-set. In the absence of AGI, this is a very effective "brute-force" approach and they have a huge upper hand over every other player in this space.
I say all of this even though I am very skeptical that anyone will achieve L5 self-driving with where the state of things are today. But Karpathy and team are very pragmatic and making lots of good decisions coupled with excellent engineering and infrastructure development.
It absolutely is implausible.
this raises the question of: what happens when those environments change?
People who bought a 3-year or 5-year lease from 2016 with the $5k full-self driving package probably should feel pissed for wasting money.
Fools and their money. Like most every expensive car, Teslas are luxury vehicles and fashion statements. People buy them because they are cool. That product was delivered. As for future features, nobody should believe Telsa's advertising any more than we do Microsoft's advertising about how the next version of Windows will solve all our computing problems. The hamburger never looks as good as it does in the commercial. Demanding such things post-purchase, after the test drive demonstrates the deficiencies of the real product, is simply buyers remorse.
They deceptively claimed that for additional money the customers' cars would be enhanced in the future with FSD. They then made that claim again each time they failed to deliver. They continue to make this claim and people are trusting it.
A lie hides the truth.
But they lied a lot though, right? "Cross county automous summon in 2017" "Coast to coast autonomous drive in 2018" "Tesla driverless taxis in 2019" are a few examples. One may hold the view that Elon musk can make grandiose statements about solving AGI and nuclear fusion in 1 hour and make futuristic statements about that, but when does it go from projection to lying?
10 years ago this might have read:
"If General Motors can't do it with its massive resources and sensors don't ever expect a Tesla to perform better than this."
FSD uses a camera, and works on all roads - and is dramatically better then supercruise.
source - test drove both, bought the tesla because of how impressed I was with supercruise.
Tesla’s unique strength, when it comes to autonomy as opposed to battery-electric vehicles, is selling hype.
And even if they don't reach FSD, they could still generate a lot of software revenue from Autopilot features.
And beyond that Tesla still does more then final assembly of EV and selling them to dealerships.
EDIT: In case my point isn't clear, if your position is predicated on the idea that anything less than full self driving is worthless garbage, you should know that is a pretty hot take. If you are instead having an emotional reaction and feel deceived I don't know what to tell you, you might have a very valid point but that doesn't appear to figure into evaluating whether a stock is under or over priced.